| |
Main
Date: 24 Feb 2006 07:26:53
From:
Subject: knight for one rook, or queen for both?
|
Here's the PGN form:
1. d4 e6 2. e4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c4 cxd4 5. Qxd4 Nc6
6. Qc3 Bb4 7. Qxb4 Nxb4 8. Na3 Ne7 9. Bd2 Nec6 10. Nf3 a5
11. cxd5 Qxd5 12. Bc4 Nc2+ 13. Kd1 Qe4 14. Re1 *
Now, at this point I wonder? should I take the rook with my knight,
and then keep my queen out of trouble, or sacrifice my my queen for the
rook, and grab the other rook too with the knight as he gets out of
queen-check? Either way I come ahead in points, (assuming I cover my
queen who's already sticking her neck out in the middle of the board.)
Just had to decide if grabbing both rooks was worth it, as he still
would have both bishops and knights with better development.
I won't post what I did for now. Just curious on what your thoughts on
the matter.
|
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 19:44:07
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?=
Subject: Re: knight for one rook, or queen for both?
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Here's the PGN form:
>
> Now, at this point I wonder? should I take the rook with my knight,
> and then keep my queen out of trouble, or sacrifice my my queen for the
> rook, and grab the other rook too with the knight as he gets out of
> queen-check?
The rule is make it simple. A bigger advantage makes it easier to win
than a smaller advantage. You should not give it away safe for a very
good reason. A good reason would be to reach an even simpler game where
it is entirely clear how to proceed to win.
Example:
FEN: 8/4k3/4p3/3b4/5K2/8/1P6/3R4 w - -
1. Rxd5 exd5 2. Ke5 with a trivial win.
I do not see this in your position and I guess you too. So you should
preserve what you have and follow the standard strategy of trading when
practicable but not trade down.
Claus-Juergen
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 17:16:20
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: knight for one rook, or queen for both?
|
En/na [email protected] ha escrit:
> Here's the PGN form:
> 1. d4 e6 2. e4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c4 cxd4 5. Qxd4 Nc6
> 6. Qc3 Bb4 7. Qxb4 Nxb4 8. Na3 Ne7 9. Bd2 Nec6 10. Nf3 a5
> 11. cxd5 Qxd5 12. Bc4 Nc2+ 13. Kd1 Qe4 14. Re1 *
>
> Now, at this point I wonder? should I take the rook with my knight,
> and then keep my queen out of trouble, or sacrifice my my queen for the
> rook, and grab the other rook too with the knight as he gets out of
> queen-check? Either way I come ahead in points, (assuming I cover my
> queen who's already sticking her neck out in the middle of the board.)
> Just had to decide if grabbing both rooks was worth it, as he still
> would have both bishops and knights with better development.
>
> I won't post what I did for now. Just curious on what your thoughts on
> the matter.
In this case there is no big difference.
- 14...Nxe1 wins easily with any trouble for black queen, because white
has no pieces for creating trouble.
I fear you considered having an extra queen to be a problem.
- 14...Qxe1 wins too, but maybe the game will have more moves.
Counting points:
- after 14...Nxe1 black is 8 points up (Q+R=14, B+N=6)
- after 14...Qxe1 15.Bxe1 Nxa1 I suppose Na1 should be lost (it has no
escape) but black is two qualities up (R+R=10, B+N=6) that mean 4 points up.
But "points" are not the correct way to think. I asume an easy to win
pawn ending (maybe only a pawn up) to be a better choice than a position
with many pieces no matter having more pieces.
AT
|
|
